Greenspan Phd Thesis Business Plan Pro Torrent
And I say guarded because I don't think he understood his system as well as some of the people around him did. By the way, he's about as smart a guy as you'll meet. And to be candid, I should tell you that I stayed on good terms with Milton for more than 60 years. When the economy was going up, we both gave the same advice, and when the economy was going down, we gave the same advice. Walter Wriston, at that time one of the most respected bankers in the country and in the world fired his whole monetarist, Friedmaniac staff overnight, because they were so off the target.
Anyway, this swept the field for a number of decades. But I didn't do it by telling him exactly everything I thought about him. People thought he was joking, but he was against licensing surgeons and so forth. But Milton Friedman had a big influence on the profession -- much greater than, say, the influence of Friedrich Hayek or Von Mises. I don't know whether you read the newspapers, but there's almost an apology from Ben Bernanke that we didn't listen more to Milton Friedman. The craze that really succeeded the Keynesian policy craze was not the monetarist, Friedman view, but the [Robert] Lucas and [Thomas] Sargent new-classical view.
What has pleasantly surprised me is that because of the Obama political sweep we've got some very rapid interventions beyond anything that the Eccles Federal Reserve even dreamed of in Franklin Roosevelt times, and that's why I think we're a little bit ahead o the European Union in the state of our recovery.
On the other hand, I think the popular view -- if I count noses -- is that by the end of this year even, or by 2010, recovery will have set in. Things could get better -- things could even get better such that the National Bureau committee that officially dates these recessions will say that the recession officially ended in something like December 2010.
And it wasn't because I was lazy; it was because my freshman class would go to a hundred different employers and wouldn't get a nibble. I realized that the ordinary old-fashioned Euclidean geometry didn't apply.
And I applauded when the major members of the Chicago faculty -- maybe even a few years before Keynes's general theory -- came out with a petition to have a deficit-financed spending without taxation in order to create a new increment of spending power. And Franklin Roosevelt, who was not a trained economist, and who experimented and made a lot of mistakes, in his first days, by good luck or good advice got the system moving.
The pendulum just swings back in the other direction. Has macroeconomics learned anything in the past 30 or even in the past 70 years? It can be better or it can be worse, but there isn't guaranteed predictability in these matters.
That could be misleading, because it could be completely consistent with continuing decreases in employability, an adverse balance of payments, and a move of both the consumer section and the investing section towards non-spending -- towards saving and hoarding. (Then my crummy Radio Shack recorder -- caveat emptor -- spent yesterday afternoon trying to destroy the file.) Sameulson is an energetic 94 years old and the conversation ran for about an hour, so I've decided to break the transcript into two parts. The first part of the conversation is mostly economic history -- the rise and fall (and rise) of Keynes, the influence of Milton Friedman, and the era of Alan Greenspan.
I don't think we would enjoy a lost decade, like the two lost decades the Japanese had. Thanks to Brad De Long for letting me know who Lorie Tarshis is, along with the proper spelling of his name. Part two covers current events -- the need for a more stimulus spending and how his nephew (one Larry Summers) is doing running the economy.
And then, when the 1970s came, with very heavy supply side shocks -- the quadrupling of OPEC oil prices overnight, a rash of bad harvests, and the terrible price/wage control system contrived by Arthur Burns and Nixon 17 months before the election in order to ensure that they won. And Keynesianism, if it was thought to promise perpetual prosperity, became disparaged. And when I went quarterly to the Federal Reserve meetings, and he was there, we agreed only twice in the course of the business cycle. And this particular group just said, in effect, that the system will self regulate because the market is all a big rational system. You can take the boy out of the cult but you can't take the cult out of the boy.
Those guys were useless at Federal Reserve meetings. And this brings us to Alan Greenspan, whom I've known for over 50 years and who I regarded as one of the best young business economists. He actually had instruction, probably pinned on the wall: 'Nothing from this office should go forth which discredits the capitalist system.